By silicon.com, 26 January 2004 17:15
Bill Gates has today been awarded an honorary knighthood. Cue the controversy - not least because of the messages this sends out at a time when Gates' company is under investigation by the EU for anticompetitive behaviour.
By awarding Gates this honour, the implication would appear to be that the UK government wholeheartedly endorses Gates' business model, despite other European leaders not being so sure. In fact it doesn't just endorse it - it even thinks it worthy of reward.
A government statement mentioned Gates' charity work as one reason he landed the gong but there has been no statement to the effect of it being his philanthropy in isolation. In fact, the Foreign and Commonwealth Office said it is as much his services to enterprise which have won him a trip to the palace.
silicon.com pressed the FCO on the issue only to be told in essence that the government doesn't really care what's going on with the EU.
But isn't the UK part of Europe? Isn't the antitrust case therefore an issue in the UK?
We were told it's not really a problem because there hasn't been a resolution in the case. But some may argue that's exactly the problem here.
Innocent until proven guilty is all well and good but given the high profile of the case wouldn't it have been prudent to adopt a wait-and-see approach, rather than undermine the credibility of the investigation by bestowing the highest possible accolade upon the man effectively standing in the dock?
So why has the government done this? After all, Gates' philanthropy is not new and he's long been a widely respected paymaster for thousands in the UK workforce.
If it had been made clear that this decision was taken purely because of Gates' philanthropy then this publication would gladly concede it is a deserved honour - as much as any of these anachronistic back-slappings ever are. But that isn't the case
This week Gates is the star turn at an event in London chaired by Chancellor of the Exchequer Gordon Brown. Last week the NHS was locked in talks with Gates over renegotiating cheaper software licences for the health service.
We're in no way suggesting that these events are linked to the knighthood but they do serve as a timely reminder as to why it's worth having Gates on side.
Whether that's an association the government really wanted to maintain at further cost to its already battered credibility is one only they can answer - but it would certainly not appear to trouble them.
However, until the latest legal wrangling blows over it makes the UK government appear to be an apologist for the rest of Europe's actions.
Comments
There are 29 comments. Join the discussion
1. Smithy
You had to go and show just how small minded and mean spirited you are didn't you?
No surprise there.
The "Hate Microsoft" brigade keep showing the whole world how really nasty and vicious you are, and how all encompassing the hatred of Microsoft has totally taken over all your mental faculties.
Lets get a few facts straight here.
1. This Knighthood for Bill Gates is for specific contributions made by Bill, including doing more to fight Malaria in Africa and thus saving more black African lives than the whole of the European Union combined!!
What Gates has done for African countries (a lot of whom are members of the Commonwealth of which the Queen is the titular head) alone is enough for Gates to be given this award.
2. Gates made a massive contribution of $210m back in 2000 to award scholarships to students from third world countries to attend Cambridge University.
3. Apart from the direct 2,000 people that Microsoft employs in Britain, Microsoft indirectly has created over 100,000 jobs in Britain.
We haven't even talked of the fact that Microsoft has yet again been awarded the best employer in Britain last year.
These are what this award is for. Its got nothing to do with an anti-American, protectionist vendetta being carried out by the bureaucrats in Brussels. This politically motivated EU "investigation" of Microsoft as you can see, continues unabated.
Can't you find something else to hate on for a change? If Microsoft did not exist where will you be directing all that hate bottled up in you?
Get a life!
2. anonymous
Microsoft is on trial. Bill Gates is an individual working at Microsoft. This column suggests that the man is being accused of something.
3. Ron Canham
Disgraceful. Bill Gates, when leading Microsoft, actively stifled world enterprise unless it was controlled by Microsoft.
So he gives a lot of money to charity, usually to buy Microsoft products or equipment to run Microsoft products, and how did he get all this money? By overcharging us for an incomplete product that has serious flaws that should never have reached the marketplace in such an unreliable state.
4. Peter Risdon
It's silly to pretend that Microsoft is not an unusually controversial company, or that Gates is an employee just like a janitor in one of the firm's buildings.
But that's what happens when disagreements over computer operating systems become religious wars; people offer polarised opinions or behave like cheerleaders.
Two points that might be beyond dispute: Microsoft is a fact of life and dominates the desktop with what has become an excellent operating system, and Microsoft have attained this position using some deeply questionable tactics that have been designed to create a monopoly. It's not just the court cases and the enquiries and commissions - MS have paid hundreds of millions of dollars in out-of-court settlements as a result of operating specific illegal anti-competitive policies which, among other things, kept a lot of first-class software out of general use.
Gates isn't a computer scientist, he is a lawyer and businessman who has elevated the pursuit of monopoly into an art form. But in many ways he has just been more successful at this, not less principled, than any of his rivals.
The honours system has frequently rewarded tycoons who have operated in dubious ways. The Labour Party has been paying for services rendered ever since they gained power in 1997.
So there's nothing startling about this award. But nor is there anything edifying about it.
5. Stuart Jones
I absolutely agree with both of the other comments posted here.
Irrespective of the accused "anti-competitive" behaviour they have taught the world many important lessons in both business and information technology.
Stop the Microsoft-bashing and get on with some proper journalism.
6. anonymous
Does this mean Sir Bill is retiring?
7. Steve Brown
I have to agree with Smithy on this. I came to Silicon.com because The Register and Slashdot were engaging in far too much politically motivated journalism and not enough factual commentary...
I don't know whether there has been a change of editor or journalist staff but I'd humbly request that Silicon returns to its original format of providing facts and allowing us to make up our own minds. I'm afraid the opinions of journalists dressed up as facts are becoming very tedious to plough through and my days reading silicon (and its associated advertising of course) are fast becoming numbered.
8. Ged Carroll
Sleazy does it.
As your editorial points out Mr Gates' gong coincides with the EU anticompetitive court case.
You missed out that he was also having a meeting with Gordon Brown, Peter Gershon of the Office of Government Commerce, and National Health Service IT head Richard Grainger. High on the list of their discussions would have been the NHS licencing debacle where millions that could be spent on caring for cancer patients will be instead spent on Windows licences if Microsoft has its way. (Ed note. We didn't miss these at all, if you read the original story and the leader you'll see a number of these issues were covered.)
Then there is also the fact that Labour has had its knuckled rapped for staging a go slow on evaluating 'open source software' potentially costing the tax payers millions more than it should.
Mr Gates has been rewarded for this contribution to the UK economy, which is why they based Microsoft's European headquarters in Ireland? The reason why Microsoft has 2,000 or so people here is the size of the UK software market, not love of the UK.
Why hasn't Mr Blair honoured other tech investors in the UK like IBM or real British success stories like Eidos or Sage?
9. anonymous
The thousands of workers at Microsoft should share the gong for generating the income that put Bill in the position to give the money to good causes.
10. anonymous
Of course it does! Our dearly beloved leader is desperate to find ways to emulate Uncle Bill, who himself seems to want to rule the world through his software! As Tony's popularity wanes, expect more such gimmicks!!!!!!
11. Steve Dodd
Smithy makes some pertinent remarks! I also agree with Steve Brown. Come on Silicon........Lets get back to factual reporting and leave the Bill bashing to the minors.
(Ed note. We appreciate all this feedback, but urge you to re-read the piece with regard to the charge of Bill bashing as we really don't see how any of you have drawn the conclusions you have. You're reading a story which doesn't even exist. The only criticism here is of the government who we believe should have adopted a watching brief while the EU case is rumbling on. Gates deserves the award - as much as anybody does - for his charitable work, but while there is such a big question mark over his business model we believe it would have been prudent for the UK government not to be seen to be taking sides.)
12. anonymous
Torvalds next then.
And he _could_ be "for services to computing".
I'd have made it the other way round, personally.
13. anonymous
Small minded, petty jealousy (again). Frankly I'm bored with reading this stuff. There isn't a CEO alive who is deserving of recognition on the basis of your wayward logic. His contribution to business has been immense. Personally I couldn't care less what he does with his money, but to sneer at him for giving money to charity is unworthy of you.
(Ed note. Did you even read the article? Clearly not. There is no sneering at Gates for giving money to charity. You're commenting on things you've made up in your own mind. The only criticism is of the UK government. We've made it clear elsewhere that the charitable work of Gates more than qualifies him for such an honour. But, we believe while the EU is investigating the business practices of Microsoft it would have been prudent to not be seen to apparently take sides.)
14. David
Lets separate man from Company. It's the man who is receiving the gong not the Company.
Yes Microsoft may be under investigation in Europe; it also was in the USA. Is there any one else?
Personally, I have not liked the tactics Microsoft has used. I feel they have (are?) stifling innovation and testing products on end users.
15. Dominic Tristram
I'm glad that people are seriously questioning this award. By all means reward Gates for his charity work - I don't think anybody could argue that this is a bad thing. However, Microsoft harms the British economy far more than it might help it. Just how many employees do they have here? It's a token amount considering the revenues generated.
If the goverment spent a third of the money it pays Microsoft for its substandard software on paying British companies to write open source alternatives, not only would the goverment have to spend a lot less but thousands more would be employed and the whole world would benefit. Who can present a rational argument against that?
The public has been brainwashed into accepting that a huge proportion of NHS and goverment budgets 'have' to go to an American corporation that is a convicted monopolist. If there's one thing MS have, it's good PR.
16. Steve Brown
I appreciate your 'ed comments' in other comments, but the very title of the article suggests you're deliberately trying to tabloidise the whole issue.
My initial comment also draws from previous articles which I've written (in private emails personally to the editor and received no response) reference your biased and factually incorrect articles of late.
Silicon used to pride itself on providing up to date INFORMATION not anecdotal opinion and this whole article can never be anything more than anecdotal opinion purely designed to attract a larger set of hits/comments for the day. In that sense it has temporarily achieved everything you desired from it - however I for one am starting to believe that Silicon's sensationalism of late will end up working against it.
(Ed note. Thanks for the feedback Steve. Sorry to hear silicon.com has been disappointing "of late" - keep the feedback coming in and we'll take all suggestions on board. Rest assured there are enough 'old hands' here to know what silicon.com "used to pride itself on".)
17. Stuart Jones
Firstly, I cannot see how the "Ed" is unable to see how the article does not come across as anti-Bill/Microsoft. I have re-read the article twice and it certainly draws nothing but criticism of Microsoft's business practices.
Secondly, it certainly fails to mention any of the positive steps in business Microsoft have enabled (to the point they are studied in UK degree courses).
Thirdly, do you really expect Microsoft (or any company for that matter) to sell software or services for free? Microsoft software is virtually free for small companies with MS qualified IT people anyway, and is certainly not expensive for large companies using open licensing. Compare Microsoft prices to any other paid-for commercial software. Or is it just you want consumers to pay more?
Enough of rant, I seriously believe Bill Gates has made a big enough contribution globablly and to the way we do business in the UK to merit his award alone. The fact that so much charity work is done in addition is a fantastic bonus. Keep up the good work.
18. anonymous
While I applaud Bill Gates philanthropic endeavors, they can't be regarded in isolation. The fact that he presides over a corporation that runs roughshod over the laws of most Western nations, with an outstanding investigation under way in Europe, should have (at least) delayed any decision regarding such an award.
[In addition to (obviously) not having read, or understood the article, Smithy seems to be basing his understanding of the world on a set of non-existent facts - 1) "The Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation made a grant of $40m to fight malaria to the London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine" (The LSHTM being a UK government funded school), not much against the $5bn that the UK spends in foreign aid every year, 2) The $210m was not simply to award scholarships - much of it was for the setting up of organisational structures in Cambridge and the purchase of IT systems (including much Microsoft software) 3) Claiming that Microsoft has 'created' 100,000 jobs doesn't make it true.]
19. anonymous
He may be a business success, but his poor quality products are the bane of many business lives - they have cost me countless hours of lost time - the best thing for the world in my view is for Microsoft to go out of business, and be replaced by someone who does show they care about us small customers.
I think that the gong is a very grave mistake!
20. Chris Knowles
Let me say first of all I am not, and never have been a Microsoft employee. I have had a 35 year career in IT, including Director level management. The fact is that if it weren't for companies like Microsoft, IBM, Oracle etc. setting de facto standards and driving the industry forward we would not be anything like as advanced as we are today. Its the old free enterprise versus regulated government thing again. I'm not saying M/s are whiter than white, and I don't think any of the others are either. But in the main these giants of the industry are what have given me and millions like me a great career and livelihood. Enjoy your gong, Bill, you deserve it.
21. Julian Patterson
I'm surprised you got such a strong reaction to such a weak editorial.
22. seve brenton
St. Anthony of Islington is a celebrity junkie. He wants to play with the big boys on the widescreen stage. That's why we joined uncle George's war, that's why he cuddles up to Berlisconi, and that's why he wants to thrill Bill. Please, please can we just send him off to the jungle to scoff maggots with the rest of the D listers?
23. Thomas OZENNE
As I alreday said to him once in a probly unread email , Bill Gates is my foe and my hero, I think he really deserves it :) computers will when they'll come of age probly will bring us a new form of world democracy we should hope to reach due to international companies , some sort of glues that within countries will link people together toward a simple goal make people happy as a community :)
24. sacerdotus
Children, Children (and Smithy),
What a lot of fuss!
Not only is it right to question the award of a Gong to Mr G, it is our duty as loyal subjects and sentient beings.
His company IS under investigation and HM Govt would not come up smelling of roses if Microsoft were found guilty of anticompetitive practice. At the very least this would appear to be a case of bad timing - but it could also be construed as rallying around a beleagured chum. Not very politic.
As for "There isn't a CEO alive who is deserving of recognition on the basis of your wayward logic", some of us may be inclined to agree - I wonder how many CEOs have indeed been knighted irrespective of dubious business practices (generous political donations notwithstanding)?
And the quote "Irrespective of the accused "anti-competitive" behaviour they have taught the world many important lessons in both business and information technology" is just plain daft. This is not a logically tenable argument. Try "Irrespective of his accused "wreckless driving", Peter is the fastest taxi driver in town." Are you going to give Peter the Taxi Driver of the Year Award while he is up for wreckless driving...?
Lets all put our toys back in the pram and read what was actually written in the article.
Rightful and appropriate recognition has been given to BG for his philanthropic work, and we can all agree this is A Good Thing.
But timely it is not.
25. D Lawrence
Can you fit a Ford front end on a Volvo, or a Mazda boot on a Fiat of course not. So why don't we make all cars the same so that all part fit all makes? It's just the way cars are. So why is Bill Gates in trouble with every one, just because he wants to fit IE and Media player to windows just like an aircon unit to a Ford or a spoiler to a Lotus. If you don't like it, take it off and fit another one. Please explain what the difference is !
26. Gerard Chadwick
To quote your original article "recognition of his contribution to enterprise, employment and charities in the UK" It is well documented the donations the Gates' give to charity, and this alone is deserving of recognition in some form, especially if UK charities are receiving aid. It is Bill Gates getting the award not Microsoft!
27. Jim Tasker
I Agree with smithy mainly, but also with anyone who puts down this stupid article.
The Microsoft Hate campaign is potentially flawed anyway. We want standardisation and full compatibility with our software - in fact many of us do nothing bu complain about issues in this area, but unfortunately in doing this you become anti-competitive.
As the others state, Bill Gates is Bill Gates, Microsoft is not. He should get the honorary knighthood for what he has done.
I think that the people with opinions like this article should put their dummies back in and get over the fact that they're never going to be knighted cos they don't fundamentally do anything that deserves it and as Smithy mentions, he has.
(Ed note. Rest assured Jim we cry ourselves to sleep at night over the fact we'll probably never get to meet the Queen.)
28. Don Tregartha
For his contribution to the incomes of support technicians everywhere.... The amount of time we all spend trying to get the darned sortware to do what it says on the tin. Perhaps these are the 100,000 jobs that Smithy refers to. If the product was half decent we could actually get on with the job.
A bit off topic - but hey, I like an anti Microsoft Rant!
29. Simon Hobson
David from Hampshire wrote :
Lets separate man from Company. It's the man who is receiving the gong not the Company.
I disagree, in this case, Bills Gates IS the company. It is clear from any number of articles that the business of Microsoft IS controlled (at least in direction and tactics) by Bill. Or are you suggestiong that Bill is somehow a 'really good chap' and thouroughly disagrees with Microsofts illegal trade practices and is afraid to say so ?
So I would agree, that while MS is in the Dock (yet again), it seems a little distasteful to be rewarding it's figurehead in such a way.